This is a book that I have seldom cooked from, but I use it all the time when I want to know what something is. I have also been known to settle in on the sofa and just read it on a cold winter's night. You can turn to any page and be amazed at what you didn't know. Larousse Gastronomique is a definite plus for any serious cook's library. My copy of came to me in 1971 as a thank you gift for a glorious meal I cooked for a friend while I was living in Washington DC.

I like books with things stuck between the pages; sometimes I find a pressed leaf or a flower or a postcard. Mostly I find recipes put there for safekeeping and long forgotten. I recently discovered the menu I made stuffed inside the front cover of my well-worn copy of my Larousse. I read the inscription my friend left me and after a few pleasant memories, I decided that this would be the next review in my Epinions compendium of cookbooks.

My Visual Merchandising career at Saks' Fifth Avenue had gone south and I was in between jobs. Being somewhat younger and bit more resourceful than I am today, I asked the owner of my local bar if I could be a waiter. The answer was "Sure, but what we really need is a cook." It seems the ABC (Alcohol Beverage Control) had been in and saw that they only made frozen pizzas on request, and even then, not very well. I was told that bars in DC have to be able to serve real food!

I said what I really needed right then was to get some rent money in my pocket, but I'd think about cooking thing. It's helpful to have a couple other talents up your sleeve when you live a precarious life, and being a waiter and sometime cook was one of mine. To make a long story short, I ended up cooking for a year or so and found out I was quite good at it.

One of the managers had wanted to impress someone, so I made a medium rare leg of lamb stuck full of garlic cloves, slathered with brown mustard and brown sugar and basted with black coffee and red wine. I served it with the tiniest, freshest string beans that were all tied up with chive strings like asparagus and nice over roasted new potatoes. The only upshot of the meal was that neither of them was that crazy about lamb, but they liked this version.

A week after the diner, Hank came into the bar with a package that was all gussied up with ribbons and bows and handed it to me. It was the very book I had been talking about getting. I knew it was not only a cookbook, but also a comprehensive cooking dictionary. Prosper Montagne was one of the greatest masters of French cooking, and now I had my own copy of his Larousse Gastronomique.

There are two prefaces, one by Auguste Escoffier and the other by Philias Gilbert. Escoffier writes, "all those who make a cult of good eating and good drinking will find that [this book] is indeed a work that they will consult with interest and one that will have a prominent place in their library." Gilbert adds, "[It] must become--and it already is . . . a reliable counsellor (their spelling) ready to be consulted at any moment and on no matter what subject connected with . . . all the arts of the table."

I also found out that the original French work had been reprinted ten times, but this was the first translating and printing in English. This edition took more than three years of preparation and contains over a million words. It contains everything from the aristocratic recipes of Carjme to the simplest recipes of the French countryside. Original French measurements were preserved, along with conversions to cup, teaspoon and tablespoon measurements.

"The text is arranged in alphabetical order , and when the French title of a recipe or article has been translated, the original French is given as well. That way, whether you are looking for Aubergine or Eggplant, you will find what you are looking for. Some salt-water fishes off European shores are not found off American shores, so the editors have suggested a similar species that could be substituted in the French recipe. As for measurements, the editors remind us that "to the French the preparation of a meal is a work of art; they believe that without creative endeavor and a loving imagination on the part of the cook very little can be achieved." You are going to have the final say-so.

Each of the French provinces is given full coverage, including a map with regional specialties printed near the cities or countryside that has made the recipe famous. Champagne, for instance, has vineyards shaded in, and an order in which the wine trade classifies them. If you are in the mood for Ardennes cooking, you can look for crayfish, trout, thrush pates and young wild boar.. If you want the food ofTroyes, you will find snails, boar's head, ham, stuffed tongue, cheeses and Andouilettes (small sausages).

Now, if you decide you want to make one of these dishes, that's another matter. You have to look them up separately and go on from there. If the recipe asks for a sauce, you will have to look that up too. Some recipes like Cassoulet go on for columns, giving you not only the history of the dish but complete instructions on cooking. There are two columns per page and the print is small (about a 10 pica). You may need a magnifying glass like me.

Soups and Broths (you just knew I'd include that one, didn't you?) go on for twenty-four pages. We start off with clear soups and progress to Consommes like a l'ambassadrice, a l'americaine, a l'admiral and all the way to Consomme au vermicelli, which is nothing more than 2 or 3 ounces of vermicelli cooked in 6 cups of consomme and served with Parmesan cheese that is passed separately.

From there we go on to cold consommes and then thick soups, cream soups, pureed soups, veloute soups, special puree and veloute soups, classical and regional soups, and international soups. There are black and white pictures galore and thirty-one color plates placed in strategic places throughout the book. All food categories are done this way and after you get used to so much information, you can easily find a recipe for anything you want to cook.

© Ed Grover 2002

This review has been moved to a new home because it was in the wrong section.


Recommended: Yes